Ok, I don't pretend to know what you are talking about nor do I really have the time to find out.
But even though you may discount my opinion I do have a reason for believing that you are on the right track with operating Tesla Coils from car alternators. I personally believe that some sources of power have a characteristic aetheric current output also and that Tesla got his effects the most interesting of which can't IMO be reproduced from grid sourced power, rather you need independant generation. So while I can't even say I'm 100% sure I'm right (a good 95% chance thogh) and I don't know if you will agree I believe that might be a fruitful direction to investigate. On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Harvey Norris <[email protected]> wrote: > > Of course I will be happy to again make a new innovation with the design of > what might be termed a > "Power factor corrected TC primary" These will be the subject of future > flicker URL submissions. In actuality I have posted to tesla list years ago > on the titled concept bearing the same name. For now here is the recent > history of postings on the subject, and how folks seemed aghast about what I > am talking about. No matter of this, I already know what I am talking about. > > For years I desired to find any possible increases of efficiency in a > Tesla Coil to be gained by using a frequency input seven to eight times > higher then 60 hz, that might be available from a constant rpm driven 3 > phase car alternator. The normal consensus was that the car alternator could > never deliver enough power to sensible operate a tesla coil. It was this > developement in 2008 that showed many clues and paradoxes involving time > distortion. This was posted to pupman as > The developement of the alternator powered tesla coil, but the URL's may be > problematic, so I must redo these before posting to vortex on the subject. > > I have mostly finished a third paper, obviously in amateurish fashion, > since I have no degree where I seek to show a demonstration, but what must > be done should be done, and this will called > "The Conversion of Time into Energy" > As I have mentioned the output energy will be shown by resonant ferrite > heating, and the sources of its voltage will be shown to be obtained from a > "expanded time source made available by air core resonant magnetic mutual > induction between phasings" where two sources of emf appear on the coils as > a driving force or voltage to the ferrite load; one by the delivery wires > and the other the induced currents obtained by mutual inductance with > opposite counterpart phases. > > Here is the past history of the binary resonant primary design, still > sitting idle in the garage for now... > > 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design > Friday, May 22, 2009 11:54 PM > From: > "Harvey Norris" <[email protected]> > Add sender to Contacts > To: > [email protected] > > A new sort of "quenched" arc gap is again brought up, to describe the > secondary ballasting system, and for considerations of probable actions for > primary ballasting. Inductive air core secondary reactive balancing of > nameplate 150 nf values has been achieved in duplicate, or in a binary > fashion. > To describe the arc gap may sound initially confusing. For the system > worked out here it must necessarily use large C values for 60 Hz. It is best > understood as a single Marx gap set-up. Two capacities are charged up > oppositely and discharged from the opposite ends not connected to the > voltage supply. However reactively balanced air core large induction coils > are in parallel to this sort of arc gap. When the arc gap is shorted the > secondary voltage process is basically "self ballasted for arc quenching > purposes" where its conduction levels at short can be measured. > When two capacities being charged oppositely in parallel are connected at > midpt short, the new resultant capacity is half the amount now in series. > The same principle can be shown inversely for the inductive reactive > counterpart especially with mutual inductance considerations for tuning. It > can be shown that when two 180 phased series resonant voltage rises are > shorted at their midpoints, the current across that midpoint path is then > reactively limited to its pathways of identical reactance in series on > either side of the midpoint path. However what may not be readily understood > or addressed as a potential arc gap improvement of that mechanism is the > fact that when the inductive reactive midpoint path shares the same lines as > the capacitive reactive midpoint path, because each current is 180 out of > phase, the new current limitation across that path becomes double of either > side alone. To address this issue, each side must be isolated from the other > in which case the measurement becomes two 150 nf values in series ~ 75 nf/ > balanced by two 65 H coil formations in series with mutual inductance to > tune by. > In this specific case here the 60 hz parallel tank factor appears to > have an acting Q factor of 6. > What this means of course is that a great gain of efficiency stands to be > gained by the power factor correction afforded by these large coils. What > this means in practicality is that a pole pig transformer on arc gap short > will act as if it is charging a 75/6 = 12.5 nf, but the actual capacity > being charged is 75 nf. However the peculiarities of this binary resonant > design are are large draw before arc ignition whereby 150 nf in parallel > being charged equates to a huge 300 nf draw, so the scheme seems unworkable > with NST's. > > It then becomes problematic to how such a charging sytem should be > employed with primaries. > I believe the best approach would be to put the arc gap midway along the > primaries pathway. A considerable amount of reduction of primary inductance > seems necessary since the C values are comparatively high. However the > paradox in this scheme is the ungodly high inductances themselves employed > in the secondary C power factor corrections and how they might be interacted > with the engaging primary inductances themselves. > Sincerely > Harvey D Norris. > > --- On Sat, 5/23/09, Dr.Hankenstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Dr.Hankenstein <[email protected]> > > Subject: RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design > > To: "'Tesla Coil Mailing List'" <[email protected]> > > Date: Saturday, May 23, 2009, 5:46 PM > > Pardon me for asking, but what in the > > world are you talking about? > I am talking about adapting a 60 hz series resonant system to that of a TC > primary arc gap. I have already built and found the secondary parameters for > a 250,000 hz NST functioning tesla coil. This uses 12 primary turns and 20 > nf. > > The first 60 hz resonant systems using a pair of 12 lb 23 gauge coils @ 140 > ohms resistance, 1000 ohms inductive reactance used 3uf per side, a very > high C value when trying to incorporate A TC design, and a blown 440 > transformer resulted when the arc gap accidently went open. Now the same > thing is done using 70 lb coils of 23 gauge wire; 840 ohms @ ~18,000 ohms > inductive reactance @ 60 hz. > > Here are some former flicker postings on the 12 lb 60 hz binary resonant > pair: which is simply two inversely made series resonances whose > configurations can be changed to tuned primary and secondary. > > I wound 140 ohms/ 23 gauge wire onto 3 inch ID smaller spools and arrived > at 1000 ohms reactance(~ 2.4 H) @ 60 hz. Using a variac to keep the input > below 120 volts to avoid overheating the wire, a pair of these can be > inversely series resonated using 3 uf for each side, where the tuning for > the pair is made according to the circumstances of their reactive amperage > consumptions; which in turn means they can be tuned for magnetic opposition > or agreement between the pair. This > procedure can produce a Q of an 11.5 fold voltage rise between a closely > spaced pair of the 12 lb coils. Next the input wires to one side are removed > after the circuit was tuned for a 1 inch separation. The former input wires > are shorted to make for a secondary air core transformer @ 60 hz,(not a high > frequency tesla coil. A smaller bathroom night light is given as that > secondaries load. Both of these systems in simultaneous operation are > pictured at both 60 volts and 90 volts input, which is the 1000 volt limit > for this volume of wire. > http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/3338764080/ > 1000 ohm 60 hz reactance coils,23 gauge/140 ohms DC resistance/ 60 volt > input > TOP; Inversely series resonated pair showing 693 volts between them > BOTTOM; Rt coil reconfigured as air core secondary with nite-lite bulb as > load showing 79 volts/ 26 ma vs 60 volt input with left lite at 60 volts > input showing that more power can be transferred thru the air then if the > same load were directly wire connected to its source. > http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/3338081529/ > 90 Volt input to 60 hz resonances, top pair produces 1000 volts between > them. Bottom air core secondary has input of .49A from primary,@ 435 volts > resonant voltage rise producing 135 volts secondary volts with bulb taking > 35.7 ma from coil/cap circulation of 143.1 ma. Paradoxically the meter > showing the relative differences between the 435 volts and 135 volts on > secondary reads 0 volts. Apparently Isolated voltage rises cannot be > compared without making the autotransformer connection. > > The > > best I can figure is that this new system is impractical to > > build due to > > the large value inductors and capacitors required. > Definitely so, but with the larger 70 lb coils in series with two 12 lb > coils, values of 150 nf can be used with the pair. In the previous pics of > the 12 lb coils, I did not show the resonant rise of amperage factor, but > this will be shown with the larger coils in flicker postings later. It is > noted that the large inductors are in series with each 150 nf value, > employing opposite polarity series resonant rises of voltage to charge the > capacities until the point of short by arc gap. > Upon short experienced with arc gap, the impedance of the entire circuit > seen by the supply increases by Q squared, and this is the first thing to be > measured; the acting resonant rise of amperage Q factor using all the C and > L values in parallel which shows 6 times more amperage in circulation > between L and C then is inputed by the source. > Now to match for the existing design using 20 nf, when the arc gap > fires the 150 nf capacities appear in series for 75 nf, almost four times > the previous 20 nf value. As previously noted the similarity to the Marx gap > is that two capacities are charged in parallel and discharge in series at > the arc gap midpoint. It should merely then be necessary to tap the former > 12 turn primary to also obtain almost 4 times less primary inductance. > > Obviously input VA > > would play a factor in choosing the appropriate values of L > > & C; > > correct? > Since stupendous L values exist for the purpose of both raising the input > voltage available at arc gap; and quenching the arc once the arc is > initiated, it does seem rather silly to suppose that by merely allowing a > couple of primary turns placed in series with an arc gap matched where the > TC secondary resonance is known; might produce results. If it does this then > would allow for speculative primary designs where primary > mutual inductance with the large exterior L values might be put into play. > > Do you have any photographs of your coil? > > I will soon work on showing flicker jpegs showing the both series and > parallel acting Q factors for the newer 94 lb system. It is balanced very > well but when employed for voltage rise a mis-balance is noted. This will > take several jpegs and days; busy with spring planting right now. > HDN > > --- On Mon, 5/25/09, Lau, Gary <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Lau, Gary <[email protected]> > > Subject: RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design > > To: "Tesla Coil Mailing List" <[email protected]> > > Date: Monday, May 25, 2009, 8:32 PM > > Hi Harvey, > > > > I must add my voice to those who don't understand what it > > is you are building and demonstrating. I've been > > toying with Tesla coils for maybe 15 years now but I'm > > having a very difficult time connecting the things you're > > describing to anything resembling a Tesla coil. > A tesla coil converts low freq into high frequency via an arc gap and LC > matchings for both the primary and secondary to resonate at the designated > higher frequency. A source frequency resonant circuit is merely the same > thing; with no arc gap necessary to transfer power through space on an air > core basis, but the actual resonant quantities used are based on the input > frequency; usually 60 hz. This may not be as efficient of a process of power > transfer since no high frequency interaction takes place. > > > > Do your devices make sparks? High voltage? Do > > they have a spark gap? > Yes, The high voltages created might have a further TC primary application. > > Is it like conventional coils where there is a low-turns > > primary and a high turns secondary? > The source frequency resonant circuits; here specifically referring to 60 > hz circuits rather then alternator derived frequencies near 465 hz as I have > tested most of my coils at both frequencies for q factors: these both > sensibly reflect a voltage rise according to turns ratio; and can operate in > either fashion as step up or down of input voltages. > > Do your coils purport to demonstrate some previously > > unrecognized electrical property or behavior? > Probably not. However there are some circumstances at alternator > frequencies near the mentioned 500 hz range where the amp turns of the > secondary exceed the primary amp turns in tight coupling. > > I think a schematic diagram would be extremely useful and > > save you a lot of typing in getting your point across. > > > > Regards, Gary Lau > > MA, USA > Likewise I will submit these in future postings. > Sincerely > HDN > > And here in a final reply I realize I made the wrong conclusion, but > sometimes it takes time to reason things out; > > RE: [TCML] 60 Hz Binary Resonant Primary Design > Monday, May 25, 2009 11:40 PM > From: > "Harvey Norris" > > > Do your coils purport to demonstrate some previously > > unrecognized electrical property or behavior? > Yes, I forgot to mention this important point, the large internal > capacity of the high induction coils, and the reduction of wire length > standing waves by this factor. > The 70 lb windings of 23 gauge on a 5 inch spool have some 8 miles of > distance: and when this is set up for arc gap purposes the coils do not > produce a TC powerful arc gap discharge, but rather a scintillating rapidly > quenched arc maintained by close proximity of adjacent surface areas of long > parallel arc bars. This is somewhat reminiscent of the Lakhovsky Multi Wave > Oscillator for demonstration of simultaneously transmitted high frequencies > by virtue of the fact that the arc could jump to smaller and larger > geometric loops; somewhat making sense of the claim to broadcast a plethora > of frequencies simultaneously. > Yet here, apparently due to the extremely long wire lengths of 8 miles > on either side of a arc or neon rf emitting bulb as an agent; that any > receiving loop as an antennae vibrates at its own resonant frequency as a > much higher harmonic of the original frequency made very low at source (wall > grid) frequency by both LC and wire length considerations. If a claim can be > easily sought it is true that the small foot or so length of the arc bars > seem to act as a multiwave oscillator without the fancy geometry or arcing > involved with such a scheme. Thus the device appears to broadcast all > frequencies simultaneously. It must be true however that after a certain > wire length is exceeded, the standing wave resonance should exceed the LC > combination resonance. Essentially this kind of field coupled with scoping > can show the resonant frequency of any L or LC coupled value. Thus it became > useful to see the natural resonant frequency of the 12 lb/@ 2.5 H coils by > this scoping method. Although the wire length is over 1.3 miles, the > natural resonance formed is near 5000 hz. The internal capacity reduced the > standing wave considerably. And when we start comparing things for the > larger 8 miles length of wire on either side between the arc gap, it seems > perfectly possible, although somewhat inconceivable that the standing wave > natural resonance may fall below the original source frequency LC values > made for 60 hz! And of course if this is true we have a mechanism for > forming extremely low frequency standing waves. > HDN > > > > Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ > >
